Tag Archives: environment

It’s funny to note how both the communist and the new wave of pro-European globalist share very similar views on most subjects. For instance, they both follow blindly the work of so-called economists that had very little real market experience (Marx for the Red, Hayek, Bastiat, Von Mises for the Blue). They’re also both eager to openly designate scrapegoats, the “invisible enemy” against whom we must all unite for the “greater good” even beyond American interests. And finally, they’re both also eager declare themselves outsiders, anti-system or anti-establishment.

Recently in our political debates, many conservative candidates have expressed views about a more open market, a free market if you will. Now free market doesn’t have to mean mere submission to the globalization of our economies as Ron Paul suggests, some markets can be very restricted yet very open to globalization (or even globalism) as California shows us.

Free market means a more open economy inside our borders, less governmental restrictions on businesses and business creation. Now as favorable as I am to this idea, our politicians and other leaders have now managed to turn what was once a genuinely good idea to a new masquerade of demagogy.

Politicians, and especially Ron Paul, seem not only to see free market as the new magic pill, but even as the only economic proposition. Free market is neither the new magic pill, there shouldn’t be any magic pills, neither should it be the only proposition of any decent candidate.

He seems to think that by allowing free market all the problems we face will be solved… well first of all that would imply that all are problems are economic, not political or ideological for example.

And secondly, where are all the other top free market countries in the world ? Once again, Ron Paul and the other liberal suckers are very good at scaffolding demagogic speeches, but as always they don’t translate in reality.

The two biggest exporters in the world, China and Germany, are also those who have some of the least free markets. The United States actually aren’t bad at all in terms of free market, ranking 6th on the 2011 economic freedom index. Germany is 25th and China 132th. Yet, we have the worst trade balance in the world, ranking 198th on… 198 countries. Note that the difference between the USA’s trade balance and the 197th is bigger than the difference between the 1rst and the 197th. If you have any experienced in statistics, you shall notice how fucked up that is.

But don’t forget that trade deficit is only the tip of the iceberg, the real consequences lie behind it : printing, taxing or borrowing money, reliance on foreign investments…

The top five countries with the best trade balance also have the least free markets : China, Saudi Arabia, Germany, Japan, Russia (source: CIA world factbook).

Not only that, but most of the successful countries also have a lot of governmental involvement : over 50% of GDP for France, Belgium, Denmark, Russia. How can Ron Paul still advocate free market as the ultimate solution, the magic pill ?

Sure free market is beneficial, I’m not saying otherwise. But it all comes down to supply and demand, and there’s a very (very) simple equation that both Ron Paul and Marx seem to ignore : supply = demand. No more, no less.

How can there be a supply when all our goods or produced by foreigners in foreign countries ? How can there be a demand when our economy, like our politicians, is completely disconnected from the reality of the market by countless stimulus plans that involve printing, borrowing or relying on foreign investments ?

Free market and economic liberty are both stimulating factors for an economy, but under no condition should they be considered as “magic pills”. If the candidates believed in real liberalism (individual responsibility), they’d drop the magic pill speech altogether and leave that for Obama. But the truth is that neither Ron Paul nor any other candidate is any better than Obama to answer our current economic issue. As a matter of fact, most of our politicians don’t even want to answer them.

It’s funny to notice the always increasing hordes of so called ecologists, environment-preserving hippies, monopolizing every mass media tool at their disposal. As if we didn’t have enough trouble with the standard anti-American movements.

The most concerning part of all this, is that they get more politicized at each media intervention. Soon they will ask for seats at the congress or what not.
Now don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against ecologic responsibility, as I myself participate when I can in several ways.

But once again, what was supposed to be an individual responsibility at first has been altered into an anti-American propaganda by… the anti-Americans and ethnomasochists. The environmentalists are yet another manifestation of anti-Americanism.

Their concerns are not environmental safety, nor are they really supporting ecology as much as they are supporting anti-Americanism. Actually, most aren’t behind ecology at all.

Not only all they providing yet another politically correct entity for anti-Americanism, as if anti-Americanism wasn’t already widely accepted, but they’re also working against our economic stability and our sovereignty. The worst is that our government is actually funding these kinds of jokes.

Take any governmental or non-governmental environmental or ecologic organization. What do they advocate ?
Buy fuel-efficient cars, recycle, buy used products and much more.

These solutions might seem to be environmentally safe at first, and even help reduce our impact on the environment. They are obviously appealing to the masses due to their nature and the excessive propaganda on the subject.

Unfortunately, they are not helpful to the environment at all compared to real ecological solutions. But the real solutions are well hidden by the obscurantist anti-American medias.

The only real ecology is to buy American. And no environmental organization has ever advocated that as a solution, simply because they are not environmentalists, just anti-Americans.

For once, let’s assume the anti-American myth of American cars being less environmental friendly, less fuel-efficient or more polluting than an imported car.
As all anti-American propaganda, this myth is completely incorrect. Coherence was never the strong point of the anti-Americans.

Even if American products, cars for example, were less fuel-efficient or any-energy-efficient than imported ones, their use is not what is most harmful to our environment.

Cars use gasoline, and most types of gasoline are not pollutant. On the other hands, the cargo ships and freighters use different types of fuel, and much more than you will ever use with any car.

The real pollution is done by sea transports, from freighters notably. But that fact is once again eluded by the anti-American media, including the “environmentalist” media.

Want to help the environment and limit our impact on it ? Don’t import. But these facts will never be publicized by the official “environmentalists”, simply because they are not ecologists, just anti-American.